date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 14:37:30 +0200
from: Thomas Stocker
subject: Re: Data access and IPCC
to: Phil Jones
Thanks Phil. We have not be inactive here at the TSU. I have approached
a number of colleagues with the problem and expect more indications in
the next few weeks to come. I hope that I will be able to have a clear
view on the way forward by the time we think of nominations and when we
like to inform our potential LAs and CLAs.
Thanks and best regards and 'till Venice,
Thomas
Phil Jones wrote:
>
> Dear Thomas,
> Attached is a document that you should only bother to look at it
> you have
> time to spare - stuck on a train or long flight. It is a submission by
> a skeptic
> to EPA in the USA.
> I'm sending it only for background. I wouldn't want this issue to be
> raised
> at the Venice meeting, but I think you'll likely to become more aware
> these people as
> AR5 advances. I was in Boulder last week and I spoke to Susan. We agreed
> that the only way IPCC can work is the collegiate way it did with AR4.
> These people know they are losing (or have lost) on the science.
> They are now
> going for the process. All you need to do is to make sure all in AR5
> are aware
> of the process and that they adhere to it. We all did with AR4, but
> these people
> read much more into the IPCC procedures.
>
> See you in Venice
>
> Phil
>
>
> At 17:17 13/05/2009, Thomas Stocker wrote:
>> Dear Phil (cc to Pauline Midgley, Head TSU WGI)
>>
>> Thank you very much for bringing this to my attention. I knew about
>> this when the first requests were placed on John Mitchell and Keith
>> Briffa and they informed us. What I did not know is that they have
>> already placed their focus on Bern (# 17)!
>>
>> At that time I argued that in principle there are two interests to
>> balance: (i) FOI, and (ii) your own privacy when it comes to opening
>> emails or other mail. Obviously, I am not in the position to judge
>> which one obtains and in fact I think a court would be needed to
>> establish exactly that balance.
>>
>> However, the Arhus Resolution, it seems to me, had another motivation:
>> open access to environmental data associated with damage, spills,
>> pollution; the latter word is mentioned twice - "climate" never. So to
>> take this convention and turn it around appears to me like a perversion.
>>
>> One important point to consider is whether Arhus really applies to the
>> IPCC activities. In no way are we involved in decision making. We
>> assess and provide scientific information. The decision makers are
>> elsewhere. More than ever need we be aware of this separation!
>>
>> We will discuss this in the TSU but then, this should be brought to
>> the level of the Secretariat, at least, since it affects the very
>> basis of our assessment work.
>>
>> Thanks again and best regards,
>>
>> Thomas
>>
>> Phil Jones wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dear Thomas,
>>> I hope you are enjoying your new job! Apologies in advance
>>> for upsetting your morning!
>>> Below there is a link to Climate Audit and their new thread with
>>> another
>>> attempt to gain access to the CRU station temperature data. I wouldn't
>>> normally bother about this - but will deal with the FOI requests
>>> when they
>>> come. Despite WMO Resolution 40, I've signed agreements not to pass on
>>> some parts of the CRU land station data to third parties.
>>> If you click on the link below and then on comments, look at #
>>> 17. This
>>> refers to a number of appeals a Brit has made to the Information
>>> Commissioner
>>> in the UK. You can see various UK Universities and MOHC listed. For
>>> UEA these
>>> relate to who changed what and why in Ch 6 of AR4. We are dealing
>>> with these,
>>> but I wanted to alert you to few sentences about Switzerland, your
>>> University
>>> and AR5.
>>> Having been through numerous of these as a result of AR4, I
>>> suspect that
>>> someone will have a go at you at some point. What I think they might
>>> try later
>>> is the same issue:
>>> Who changed what and why in various chapters of AR5?
>>> and
>>> When drafts of chapters come for AR5, we can't review the chapter
>>> as we
>>> can't get access to the data, or, the authors can't refer to these
>>> papers as the data
>>> haven't been made available for audit.
>>> Neither of these is what I would call Environmental Information,as
>>> defined by the Aarhus Convention.
>>> You might want to check with the IPCC Bureau. I've been told that
>>> IPCC is
>>> above national FOI Acts. One way to cover yourself and all those
>>> working in AR5
>>> would be to delete all emails at the end of the process. Hard to do,
>>> as not everybody
>>> will remember to do it.
>>> I also suspect that as national measures to reduce emissions begin
>>> to affect people's
>>> lives, we are all going to get more of this. We can cope with op-ed
>>> pieces, but these
>>> FOI requests take time, as the whole process of how we all work has
>>> to be explained
>>> to FOI-responsible people at each institution.
>>> Keep up the good work with AR5!
>>> Cheers
>>> Phil
>>>
>>>
>>>> Dear Mr Jones
>>>>
>>>> As a UK tax payer from the productive economy, could you please
>>>> explain why you restrict access to data sets that are gathered using
>>>> tax payer funds e.g. CRUTEM3. Can you believe how embarassing this
>>>> is to a UK TAX PAYER, putting up with your amateurish non disclosure
>>>> of enviromental information.
>>>>
>>>> For reference http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=5962 refers to your
>>>> absymal attitude to public data, although this is just the latest in
>>>> an embarassing set of reasonable requests from CRU, who the hell do
>>>> you think you are? There will of course be an FOI on the back of this
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> Ian
>>> Prof. Phil Jones
>>> Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090
>>> School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784
>>> University of East Anglia
>>> Norwich Email p.jones@uea.ac.uk
>>> NR4 7TJ
>>> UK
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>
>> --
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Thomas Stocker
>> Climate and Environmental Physics stocker@climate.unibe.ch
>> Physics Institute, University of Bern ph: +41 31 631 44 62
>> Sidlerstrasse 5 fx: +41 31 631 87 42
>> 3012 Bern, Switzerland www.climate.unibe.ch/stocker
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Prof. Phil Jones
> Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090
> School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784
> University of East Anglia
> Norwich Email p.jones@uea.ac.uk
> NR4 7TJ
> UK
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
--
------------------------------------------------------------------
Thomas Stocker
Climate and Environmental Physics stocker@climate.unibe.ch
Physics Institute, University of Bern ph: +41 31 631 44 62
Sidlerstrasse 5 fx: +41 31 631 87 42
3012 Bern, Switzerland www.climate.unibe.ch/stocker
------------------------------------------------------------------